From: YourName@YourISP.com   
      
   In article <4ce4b6cf-bd26-4bd2-8ae0-e9e46db52e79@googlegroups.com>,   
   jack  wrote:   
   >   
   > It was more than a couple of years for the Republic to fall.  The first   
   > trilogy takes about what, 10-15 years to take place, and the plotting was   
   > well under way at the start of SWI.  The Empire fell much more quickly.   
      
   If you want to get picky about it, then the fall of Empire started   
   before Palpatine even declared it as a Empire. The seeds of the   
   Rebellion were already growing.   
      
      
      
   > I know we're talking in a vacuum, but I don't think VII-IX has to be   
   > that political, but just be placed in a rebuilding Republic.  yeah, I   
   > would be disappointed if VII-IX take place in a fully functioning   
   > Republic II.   
      
   It will be "fully functional", but that doesn't necessarily mean there   
   wouldn't still be small pockets of Empire fighting back somewhere under   
   the leadership of previously fairly minor commanders ... then again, 30   
   years is a LONG time and it's extremely unlikely any "rebuilding" wil   
   be seen in the new Trilogy.   
      
   The new Trilogy is almost certainly based around one of the Skywalker /   
   Solo kids going bad. It's the only thing that really makes any sense   
   and ties the now-three Trilogies together. Bringing in some new bad guy   
   nobody ever heard of before (as in the novels with the invading aliens)   
   or a "clone Emperor" (aslo in the novels) is rather silly.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)